scholarly journals Conditioned inhibition in feature negative discrimination learning with pigeons

1980 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel S. Gokey ◽  
Robert L. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Feature Negative

EXPRESS: Inhibitory causal structures in serial and simultaneous feature negative learning

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110222
Author(s):  
Peter F. Lovibond ◽  
Jessica C. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Bayes Factor ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Causal Structure ◽  
Training Transfer ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Summation Test ◽  
Occasion Setting ◽  
Simultaneous Training ◽  
Human Participants ◽  
Feature Negative

We have previously reported that human participants trained with a simultaneous feature negative discrimination (intermixed A+ / AB- trials) show only modest transfer of inhibitory properties of the feature B to a separately trained excitor in a summation test (Lee & Lovibond, 2021). Self-reported causal structure suggested that many participants learned that the effect of the feature B was somewhat specific to the excitor it had been trained with (modulation), rather than learning that the feature prevented the outcome (prevention). This pattern is reminiscent of the distinction between negative occasion-setting and conditioned inhibition in the animal conditioning literature. However, in animals, occasion-setting is more commonly seen with a serial procedure in which the feature (B) precedes the training excitor (A). Accordingly, we ran three experiments to compare serial with simultaneous training in an allergist causal judgment task. Transfer in a summation test was stronger to a previously modulated test excitor compared to a simple excitor after both simultaneous and serial training. There was a numerical trend towards a larger effect in the serial group, but it failed to reach significance and the Bayes Factor indicated support for the null. Serial training had no differential effect on self-reported causal structure, and did not significantly reduce overall transfer. After both simultaneous and serial training, transfer was strongest in participants who reported a prevention structure, replicating and extending our previous results to a previously modulated excitor. These results suggest that serial feature negative training does not promote a qualitatively different inhibitory causal structure compared to simultaneous training in humans.

scholarly journals Stable Individual Differences in Occasion Setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 281-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Glautier ◽  
Ovidiu Brudan
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Conditioned Response ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Reversal Training ◽  
Experimental Task ◽  
Occasion Setting ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
Ambiguous Information ◽  
First Order ◽  
Feature Negative

Abstract. In the current investigation, we classified participants as inhibitors or non-inhibitors depending on the extent to which they showed conditioned inhibition in a context that had been used for extinction of a conditioned response. This classification enabled us to predict participant responses in a second experiment which used a different design and a different experimental task. In the second experiment a feature-negative discrimination survived reversal training of the feature to a greater extent in the non-inhibitors than in the inhibitors and this result was supported by Bayesian analyses. We propose that the fundamental distinction between inhibitors and non-inhibitors is based on a tendency to utilize first-order (direct associations) or second-order (occasion-setting) strategies when faced with ambiguous information and that this classification is a stable individual differences attribute.

scholarly journals Preprint GlautierAndBrudan2018 Revised Stable Individual Differences in Occasion Setting

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Glautier ◽  
Ovidiu Brudan
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Conditioned Response ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Reversal Training ◽  
Experimental Task ◽  
Occasion Setting ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
Ambiguous Information ◽  
First Order ◽  
Feature Negative

There is a revised version at https://osf.io/uspdb/ In the current investigation we classified participants as inhibitors or non-inhibitors depending on the extent to which they showed conditioned inhibition in a context thathad been used for extinction of a conditioned response. This classification enabled us to predict participant responses in a second experiment which used a different design and a different experimental task. In the second experiment a feature-negative discrimination survived reversal training of the feature to a greater extent in thenon-inhibitors than in the inhibitors and this result was supported by Bayesian analyses. We propose that the fundamental distinction between inhibitors andnon-inhibitors is based on a tendency to utilise first-order (direct associations) or second-order (occasion-setting) strategies when faced with ambiguous information andthat this classification is a stable individual differences attribute.

scholarly journals PreprintGlautierBrudan2019OSIDRevised

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Glautier ◽  
Ovidiu Brudan
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Response ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Reversal Training ◽  
Current Investigation ◽  
Experimental Task ◽  
Occasion Setting ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
Ambiguous Information ◽  
First Order ◽  
Feature Negative

In the current investigation we classified participants as inhibitors or non-inhibitors depending on the extent to which they showed conditioned inhibition in a context that had been used for extinction of a conditioned response. This classification enabled us to predict participant responses in a second experiment which used a different design and a different experimental task. In the second experiment a feature-negative discrimination survived reversal training of the feature to a greater extent in the non-inhibitors than in the inhibitors and this result was supported by Bayesian analyses. We propose that the fundamental distinction between inhibitors and non-inhibitors is based on a tendency to utilise first-order (direct associations) or second-order (occasion-setting) strategies when faced with ambiguous information and that this classification is a stable individual differences attribute. (138 words)

scholarly journals Preprint GlautierAndBrudan2018 Stable Individual Differences in Occasion Setting

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Glautier ◽  
Ovidiu Brudan
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Conditioned Response ◽  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Reversal Training ◽  
Experimental Task ◽  
Occasion Setting ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
Ambiguous Information ◽  
First Order ◽  
Feature Negative

There is a revised version at https://osf.io/6haqn/ In the current investigation we classified participants as inhibitors or non-inhibitors depending on the extent to which they showed conditioned inhibition in a context that had been used for extinction of a conditioned response. This classification enabled us to predict participant responses in a second experiment which used a different design and a different experimental task. Our results were repeated in two replications and supported by Bayesian analyses. In the second experiment a feature-negative discrimination survived reversal training of the feature to a greater extent in the non-inhibitors than in the inhibitors. We propose that the fundamental distinction between inhibitors and non-inhibitors is based on a tendency to utilise first-order (direct associations) or second-order (occasion-setting) strategies when faced with ambiguous information and that this classification is a stable individual differences attribute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document